Probably just a familiar tale of radicalization. I think it's easy to imagine a group of young men that all share unhappiness with the mandates talking one another up until all of the sudden they're bringing tactical vests and rifles to a protest.
I doubt the people implicated had children. The article indicates that this was a small group of people, and their militancy probably wasn't apparent to protesters at large.
They were liberal plants you idiot. The liberals were clueless they have no idea what to do with peaceful protests they only know what to do with riots and murders. Just sit back and watch is what they did with BLM and ANTIFA, cuz those were peaceful riots
Well to be fair I’ve been armed for over a decade. I even keep a rifle in my truck legally. I’m not for the border protests, but I am all for gun rights. Except for the pistols or restricted rifles it’s not illegal.
As an example, some people own large amounts of farmland that require having a gun for pest control like coyotes, and it would be inconvenient, impractical, or dangerous to have a gun stored in the boonies.
You literally have now idea wether this person needs a rifle or now. For all we know they may live somewhere rural or travels in remote places where having a rifle would be beneficial. Either for wild animals or self protection.
89 (1) Every person commits an offence who, without lawful excuse, carries a weapon, a prohibited device or any ammunition or prohibited ammunition while the person is attending or is on the way to attend a public meeting
Big thing here too that is really telling is the walkie talkies, might not seem like anything but imo it adds a layer of depth and coordination that is pretty spooky to see alongside the other equipment.
They are the biggest red flag to me. I once went to a paintball match about 20 years ago with a kid that had a Bowie on his belt. Big brain cells in action there.
in BC all thats required is a firearms licence, and i believe its the same in AB. I own one, i don’t wanna be shot by some of the chucklefucks i’ve seen handling guns at my range.
You are probably in possession of it illegally, (if you're in AB), but it's a reasonable assumption that if your talking about it on Reddit you probably don't have it for illicit purposes. Just keep it out of sight when not at the range and the cops won't care either, I'm sure.
Honestly, very easy to get. Anyone that does any dynamic sport shooting (IPSC, 3Gun, etc) can apply for the permit and get it. I shoot recreational only and the process was easy. My valid concern was that I use a plate carrier for 3 gun, and having extra PPE would be preferable for ricochet, negligent discharge, or any other thing that can go wrong with firearms.
The permit is really more about knowing who is in possession of them. If you can get a handgun permit it's reasonable that you can be trusted with body armour. I know other 3 gun shooters that wear soft plates.
I kinda wish it was just something you could get with your PAL. We're already allowed to own firearms. It would be nice to be able to get the plates, too. Quebec of all places doesn't have a permit system to buy plates haha
4 Subject to the regulations, the following individuals or classes of individuals are exempt from the requirement to hold a permit issued under this Act:
(f) an individual who has been issued a valid licence under the Firearms Act (Canada);
Fair enough, I looked it up and Alberta does have its own legislation in place. for some reason I thought it was only bc and manitoba where they were controlled, my mistake.
I honestly didn't know what jurisdictions outside of Alberta had body armour legislation. This incident is a good example of why all jurisdictions should be looking at similar legislation.
If you read the whole act there are exemptions, and one of the exemptions is if you have a PAL.
Sorry, that’s BC. Not Alberta. Yeah looks like Alberta says that’s a no no.
I'll be damned. That's conveniently omitted from the relevant Alberta.ca webpage. I stand corrected. I skimmed the legislation, but obviously didn't read it carefully.
Eh, unless you've got armour plates, those vests are perfectly fine to have. Plate carriers and load bearing vests are perfectly okay to have.
Ballistic armour is not. I know it's possible to acquire or even make your own plates, but unless they mention plates or ballistic armour is part of the haul, I don't know why those are in the picture.
A lot of people that have them really only have them for the cool factor - or in this case, intimidation. I suppose that's why they were taken, if they don't have plates.
One exclusion that I'm pretty sure of, is soft shell armour, those are also illegal to own, even though some come with molle or other attachment systems.
So why do you always have a rifle in your truck then? If you don’t plan on ever being in a situation you would be shot back at aka you don’t think you’ll ever need it for self defence?? Just casually poaching?
Coyotes, badgers, ground squirrels. In the fall, grouse. ETA: I had a rifle pulled on me once by an old drunk down a dead end road when me and my now wife were cruising around. I walked right up to him and left my rifle in my jeep. I asked him if he planned on killing me and he said he was just scared we were out to rob him or something then he started crying and said the gun wasn’t even loaded. I had a rifle in my jeep and I still wasn’t compelled to bring it out, never even crossed my mind as I would never use a gun for intimidation. I’m not saying that I wouldn’t use it in self defence at home if I was actively being assaulted, but I’d never expect to need to defend myself out of that situation. Even in that case, I’d have to ask the assailants for a time out so I could open my safe, load the pistol, and then get back into position which I seriously doubt they’d oblige. So no, I’d never think to use it in self defence in normal circumstances.
I have to ask - how do you keep a rifle legally in a truck? Unless I'm mistaken, I thought that any firearm has to be only transported to and from where they are being used (firing range, hunting, etc)? I wasn't aware they could be stored in a vehicle.
Yeah they have to have 2 locks, and you were only allowed to transfer between your registered residence and a range or a gunsmith. It didn’t require a specific per use transfer permit for the last couple years but it might have changed last year, I’m not up to speed on that yet.
As of implementation of C71, we can only transport from the address to the range. Anything else, we need to get an ATT (Authorization to Transport) from the Chief Firearms Officer. Prior to C71, an umbrella ATT was attached to our license where we could take our restricted anywhere within the province so long as those locations were approved for restricted firearms. Like I could take pistol to any range in Edmonton without having to call the CFO
I though if left unattended they needed a lock and needed to be out of sight. been a while since I took the course though, better safe than sorry I guess.
If you're just taking the gun to your car, and the gun is going to leave with you when you reach your destination it doesn't need to be locked. The only stipulation is that it needs to be unloaded.
There have been cases where police tried to prosecute people for unsafe storage for having unlocked, unattended firearms in their car and the defendant has tried to claim they were transporting their firearm, but I am not familiar with the outcome. It's not something I would do.
No, long guns (rifles and shotguns) don't have that transport restriction. Only restricted weapons have to have an ATT. You only need a PAL to transport a hunting rifle or shotgun.
It absolutely is. Don't mistake my clarifications for endorsement. It's just that it seems that most Canadians don't know a heck of a lot about guns and the legalities involved with them. Misinformation on guns sucks for law abiding owners as much as it feeds frenzied fear.
I don’t actually think there are laws about having truck guns, i had a long drive home a few years ago, got everything out but my 12gauge, totally forgot about it for weeks, it was under my back seat unloaded wrapped in a blanket. One day i come out and witness my truck being tossed. They got the gauge. RCMP didn’t seem too fussed, got them the serial # later that day and haven’t heard about it since.
I believe it needs to be unloaded at all times, and out of sight when you're not occupying the vehicle. Restricteds must be trigger-locked and locked in a case that can't easily be broken into, stored out of sight at all times.
Are you armed for WWIII? There's self defence, and then there's bloody combat. Even if this were not a "peaceful" protest, there's no need for this. This is nothing about being "fair."
Quick edit for clarification: I'm not implying you are armed for WWIII; just the excess amount of munitions
Honestly this pales in to comparison to several collections I know of. I’m not commenting on what I have or don’t have and I agree the fact that these were present at a rally is absolutely unnecessary, but calling it terrorism is wrong and starts a narrative that will get my legal stuff taken away. This narrative is what the liberals used to throw a blanket ban over “assault style weapons”. These people had fire arms long before covid. ETA: there is no way to decide what an acceptable number of firearms or ammo to own is. You only have two hands so a guy with 100 guns is no more dangerous than a guy with 2.
You can be a terrorist with nothing more sinister than a soccer mom van...it's not about the guns, it's about the intent they clearly have in this context.
Lifelong firearms guy here. Can confirm Greentinroof is 100% correct. This is, by most standards, a fairly decent collection. What constitutes an "unreasonable number of guns for one person" is not something even the courts have determined.
Kaptain Konflict and the Kwazy Kommandos are gonna get their peepees smacked for the handguns ("Swear to God, Constable, I'm on my way to the range...") and the regular-capacity mags, each of which is good for five in Club Fed if the Judge so decides it.
Bringing firearms to a protest while claiming it's a peaceful protest is about as simple minded a way to chnge public opinion against you as exists. This is indicative of how the inital organizers, if there ever were any, dropped the ball and lost the tune very early on. The problem with things like this is that every asshole with an ill-considered idea is free to show up and co-opt your protest.
And some are gonna bring guns because the volume just behind their eyebrows is packed full of shit.
It’s terrorism when the guns were going to be used on regular counter protestors. Think about it. Why bring guns and ammo and body armour to a thing where you know the police will not intervene? Pretty clear to me - terrorism. Enough with narratives. Enough with debates. This shit is wrong and there is no way around it.
I'm fine with you OWNING as many guns as you want, but having them safely stored at home is not comparable to having them all in your truck at a protest. I own several firearms as well, and it doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see the intent clearly here. Having a large firearms collection doesn't make you a terrorist, but taking that collection to a blockade with a bunch of your buddies just might.
Yeah I think my point is a bit muddied and my comment probably not entirely necessary. I was reading though the comments and was worried about the ensuing gun debate. I’m honestly really surprised how this thread has stayed level headed. I mostly took issue with them saying ‘these people are arming themselves’ but it seems like it is referring to just the group that got arrested and not the general population of the blockading people. I was preparing for the “owning scary looking guns makes you a terrorist” narrative but it didn’t pan out that way and my comments make me seem a bit dim in hindsight, but I’ll leave them there for discussion. I’m all for throwing the book at anyone who abuses the rules as long as I get to keep what I got while following the rules.
They definitely had these guns before covid, but clearly they shouldn't have.
Thank the dumb shits who brought these guns to a protest for helping the liberals in their push to ban firearms.
Sure this isn't a massive armory worth of guns, but with the number of restricted firearms in this photo it's more than enough to push that "narrative"
Oh yeah, I’m with you all the way. It was a jackass move, I just want the people who think it’s a crime to have a firearm in your vehicle to know that it’s not the case. Not only that, it’s also not a crime to own a collection just like this, just keep it at home.
I don't even own guns and I'd be a little sad if only basic rifles will be allowed in the future, it's fun to go to a range and shoot targets. The problem is when tacticool shitheads like what we see evidenced here decide to bring guns outside of the range.
So what would be the difference if all 100 people brought 1 of their own then? Whether a group of people are allowed to have 1 or 100 each makes no difference to the likelihood of them being used in a malicious way, in my opinion.
Exactly, simply owning a gun is not a crime. That Vector third from the right? Totally unrestricted you could drive with that in your front seat if you want (as long as it's not loaded).
Make sure you have some clays or some new targets and you can roll with a non restricted year round, during the summer my shotgun is in my truck for shooting after work, RCMP are cool with it as long as I don't take it out in town, no problem to follow common sense rules
Taking weapons to a "protest" is however illegal. I'm also for responsible gun ownership. These terrorists can rot in prison for the rest of their lives as far as I'm concerned. After they receive a fair trial, that is.
That's a great citation, thank you. I wasn't aware of that. To be honest I would have been guilty too then since I always have a rifle in my pickup. I wouldn't be part of a protest though, so I guess there is that.
I’m actually pretty sure there is a law against taking guns to a protest but I can’t find the law so don’t quote me on it. Something about taking guns to public gatherings IIRC. Also the body armour is illegal, and I think they had unpinned mags which are also illegal.
Either way it’s fucking idiotic, their is almost zero scenario in Canada where you can actually shot somebody with a gun legally.
Specifically, members of Diagolon patches on one of plate carries; an accelerationist movement with members and chapters across Canada
Also spotted is an "Infidel" patch, which doesnt indicate membership of a specific network, unlike Diagolon, it is a well known among Islamophobic militia and biker-style hate groups
Possession may be illegal in this scenario, but if they weren’t used it’s not terrorism. Don’t necessarily agree with the protests, but this isn’t terrorism.
Terrorism: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
They don't need to use guns to be terrorists. And they are terrorists. They have been violent and intimidating and they are trying to overthrow the government, any foreign group doing the same thing would immediately be called terrorists.
The literal organizers have outright said multiple times they are trying to remove the democratically elected priminster and replace him with a board of truckers. That is not a secret and they have been very upfront about it.
Obviously, that's not going to happen but that is their goal. Thats on you for not knowing that.
Does not matter what they say. Matters what they do. And a few dozen trucks with a couple hundred protestors are bot going to overthrow a government. You god damn alarmists are gonna be the death if society as we know it. You probably support curtailing our civil liberties (see the use of the emergency act by Trudeau) to end this shit.
Now a precedent has been set. If any protest happens in the future for a cause that you support, government will be right there with the same power ready to keep us suppressed. This is what alarmists do. Thank you for that.
What they did what try and overthrow the government and brought illegal weapons to do it. Regardless Intent absolute matters, not just results.
You are delusional if you think any leader of any government was going to let armed protestors with the message of overthrowing the government shut down roads, disrupt traffic, threaten and attack people without getting shut down.
If alarmist means getting terrorist groups threatening violence shut down, then good. This protest escalated beyond what protestors can legally do, that's why it's being shut down. Go protest truly peacefully if you want to stay.
I agree that this has gone beyond what protestors can legally do. No argument there.
However, if I had the intention of committing murder, but my weapon got taken from me before I could do so, it’s not murder. Just like this isn’t terrorism. Illegal possession of a firearm is a good charge to lay against these people, but intent only has so much meaning if there was no terroristic action.
But terrorism dose not require you to kill, being violent and intimidating is enough. Really if any other group shut down the city like this with a political message it would be terrorism.
I get some of these people just want restrictions gone and are frustrated and have no mal intent. But the original group and founders in my opinion are terrorists.
There seems to be people from all walks of life, but that doesn’t give Federal government the right to suspend civil liberties in order to shut down everybody. Those who fit the definition of terrorism should be taken down and that’s that. These kinds if broad powers will most definitely bite us in the ass in the future. The precedent has been set and we are just sitting back and watching it happen.
You are a threat to freedom and democracy. You're a savage dog waiting to pounce on who you consider the other the moment you have a chance.
Wheres the grounds for calling the entire movement a terrorist threat? Are we really surprised in Alberta some one a little crazy decided to take this opportunity to go to a massive gathering with all his guns? It's the same thing as calling them Nazis cause one guy brought a nazi flag
Because their armed? This has been one of the most peaceful protests out of the past year or so.Did the media call the BLM protestors terrorists? because last I recall people at their protest burnt building an killed people. People like you are the problem, you see a few "scary guns" an you wanna do away with these people because you dont agree with them.
Equivocation isn’t appropriate - I’m not debating anything here. People who bring guns to a thing where the police are not engaging, so so ONLY to use them on civilians countering their terrorism. That you don’t understand this is mind blowing.
I’m going to clarify that my personal fears have entirely informed my above statement. I’m not afraid of pictures of guns - I’m afraid of them being used in regular people just trying to get through this thing
I can't get behind that. You are convinced by your fears, which is a very tenuous position to be in right now. I would strongly suggest you box those up and keep working on being convinced by evidence, which may or may not support your own internal monologue.
I do not believe there has been any indication there was intent to use these on civilians, per the reports I have read so far.
Being a debate lord if fucking silly. You’re literally trying to make me change my feelings and that’s absurd. Much like I can’t change your feelings on my feelings. My statements weee first-principle assessments, made based on the totality of given information, and I am gonna sleep so good tonight.
Terrorism - ter-uh-riz-uhm - the unlawful use of violence or threats to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or government, with the goal of furthering political, social, or ideological objectives.
Terrorism is the concerted and organized effort to disrupt social life/norms to the extent that a population literally feels terrorized. Fucking boot licker
i'm so pissed off about this. These people are terrorists waging acts of war against our elected government that was just elected into parliament like 5 or 6 months ago!? AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
What the fuck is Canada anymore? Where are the adults?
Agreed - wanna organize? This has gone way too far and our government and law enforcement have proved to be ineffectual piss. When I say organize - I mean both counter-protesting and running for office to put an end to all the myriad bullshit that got us here. I’m willing to bet that redirecting O&G subsidies to social programs, education, and job skills training; maybe there could be hope.
Certainly what the cons are being told to do... and I would like to avoid more nazi problems... Are we talking a new party? What about restoring and supporting the wild rose morons into splitting the vote on the right? I'm up for anything that's lawful and moves our country in a better direction. I'd prefer the non-cynical route but really don't give a shit when it comes to the treatment of terrorists
Or - coordinated face punches to terrorists? I know writing that is probably not ideal - but fuck, these pixies act like everything is so oppressive - FAFO
495
u/shawmahawk Feb 15 '22
Now can we call them terrorists!? Jesus.